Transcript Introduction to Cognitive Psychology




Many different methodologies are used to study
cognitive science. As the field is highly interdisciplinary,
research often cuts across multiple areas of study
(triangulation), drawing on research methods from the
biological level of analysis and the socio-cultural level
of analysis.
The Principles of the cognitive level of analysis act as
building block for the research methodology.
Some methods commonly used at the CLOA are:
 Brain Imaging Technologies (Under the assumption of principle
1)
 Experiments (under the assumption of principle 2)
 Case studies (under the assumption of principle 3)
How would Brain Imaging Technology be beneficial to a
cognitive psychologist?

Under the assumption of principle 1:
Physiological processes give rise to cognitive
processes, studying the physical brain and its
chemical components can give us insight into
mental processes such as memory, language,
emotions, etc.

Under the assumption of principle 1:
Physiological processes give rise to cognitive
processes, studying the physical brain and its
chemical components can give us insight into
mental processes such as memory, language,
emotions, etc.


Neuroscientists can now study which brain
areas are active when people attempt certain
cognitive tasks through the use of PET and fMRI
scans.
More specifically, scientist can localize
physiological causes of cognitive impairments.


Cognitive Psychologist Michael
Lipton has been investigating
mild cognitive impairment using
MRI scans to identify brain
regional differences in athletes.
More specifically, he has
investigated soccer players who
suffer from mild cognitive
impairment due to head to ball
contact during soccer activities.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xmo
a3g_science-talk-frequent-heading-insoccer-can-lead-to_tech


For the study, researchers used an advanced MRIbased imaging technique to scan the brains of 38
amateur soccer players, then compared the
images to the number of times they headed the
ball during the past year.
Players who frequently headed the ball showed
brain injuries similar to those seen in patients with
concussions, they also reported "significant injury" in
those players who exceeded 1,000 to 1,500
headers per year.


According to Lipton, "Heading a soccer ball is not
an impact of a magnitude that will lacerate nerve
fibers in the brain," he added. "But repetitive
heading may set off a cascade of responses that
can lead to degeneration of brain cells. These are
the type of findings that are possible with brain
imaging technology”.
Lipton’s brain imaging research identified five areas
of the brain—responsible for attention, memory and
visual functions—that were affected by heading,
according to results.



How does this brain imaging technique benefit
cognitive psychologists? What does it allow for
them to do?
What are the ethical benefits of this
technology.
Does correlation imply causation? Can we say
from this technology that the factor caused the
brain damage?
• Under the assumption of principle 2: Models of mental
processes can be proposed and investigated
scientifically.
• One of the most scientific ways to study mental
processes is through lab experiment because the high
degrees of control allow researchers to isolate a
particular component of the cognitive process. For
example, participants will take part in memory tests in
strictly controlled conditions.
•
One example high-lighting the importance of
experimentation in cognitive research is the classic study of
John Stroop .
• In 1935, Stroop created a task that demonstrated the
cognitive process of attention processing in word
recognition.
• The classic experiment consisted of two conditions. In the
first condition, two lists of words were shown to the
participants.
• More so than any other level of analysis, cognitive
psychology benefits from scientific evidence because
of the ethical ability to use humans in control
laboratory situations (as with the stroop effect)
• Animals, however, are also used in situations were
cause and effect cannot be ethically determined with
human participants (as was the case with
environmental enrichment studies and acetylcholine
studies).
• More so than any other level of analysis, cognitive
psychology benefits from scientific evidence because
of the ethical ability to use humans in control
laboratory situations (as with the stroop effect)
• Animals, however, are also used in situations were
cause and effect cannot be ethically determined with
human participants (as was the case with
environmental enrichment studies and acetylcholine
studies).
Often, human participants are instructed to perform
tasks in an experimental setup.
• Since the 1990s, various software packages have
eased stimulus presentation and the measurement of
behavior in the laboratory.
• Apart from the measurement of response times and
error rates, experimental psychologists often use
surveys before, during, and after experimental
intervention and observation methods.
•
•
One example high-lighting the importance of
experimentation in cognitive research is the classic study of
John Stroop .
• In 1935, Stroop created a task that demonstrated the
cognitive process of attention processing in word
recognition.
• The classic experiment consisted of two conditions. In the
first condition, two lists of words were shown to the
participants.
• The results of these two studies led Stroop to
conclude that since people are more practiced
at word reading than naming colors, there is less
interference with word reading than with color
naming.



How does this experiment (and others) benefit
cognitive psychologists? What does it allow for
them to do?
What are the ethical benefits of this method.
Can we or should we generalize from
controlled lab experiments?
Strengths: Controlled environment offers high replicability
and low chances for any errors. We are often able to
isolate a specific cognitive process with research
experiments.
Weaknesses: Has low ecological validity since tests are
done in controlled laboratory environment, not very
reliable unless a large it is done on a large sample group
(which, in turn, can be very costly and time consuming)
For example, a person may respond a certain way because they
know they are apart of an experiment.
• This method is used by Cognitive Psychologists when
conducting research on an unusual or very specific
case.
• A case study involves conducting research on just one
participant in detail and over a long period of time. For
example, cognitive psychologists may use the case
study method when looking at rare cases of amnesia
or when attempting to understand how social
deprivation or enrichment can influence our
cognitions.
Under the assumption of principle one and principle
three, case studies can be used to investigate various
cognitive processes at the cognitive level of analysis.
Case studies allow cognitive psychologist to study
environmental factors (such as the case with Genie) as
well as pre-existing biological lesions (such as the case
with Broca, Genie, and Clive Wearing).
These case studies can be mentioned (in the context of
cognitive science) as examples of how the method is
used specifically at the cognitive level of analysis.
Strengths: Provides in insight into unusual phenomenon
that occurs very rarely or unethical to replicate (e.g.
Clive Wearing or Phineas Gage), findings that
contradict traditional beliefs about cognitive
processes can open windows for new ideas and
theories, thus, stimulating new researches
For example: Case studies on feral children can lead
to further research on language as a cognitive
adaptive process.
Weaknesses: Cases cannot be scientifically
replicated. Because of the in-depth nature of case
studies, we can only partially generalize from the
results.
Case studies also do not show cause and effect
(because they only describe the cognitive process,
not scientifically manipulate the cognitive process)



How does this method benefit cognitive
psychologists? What does it allow for them to
do (that is different from other methods)?
What are the ethical benefits of this technology
method.
Can we or should we generalize from case
studies at the cognitive level?